PredictionsMock2008 Presidential Predictions - Gceres (R-CA) ResultsPolls
Note: The Google advertisement links below may advocate political positions that this site does not endorse.
Date of Prediction: 2008-11-03 Version:52

Prediction Map
Gceres MapPrediction Key

Confidence Map
Gceres MapConfidence Key

Prediction States Won
270 |
538 |
pie
Dem291
 
Rep247
 
Ind0
 
 

Confidence States Won
270 |
538 |
pie
Dem206
 
Rep187
 
Ind0
 
Tos145
 

State Pick-ups

Gain Loss Hold Net Gain
ST CD EV ST CD EV ST CD EV
Dem+50+53-20-14182238+39
Rep+20+14-50-53263233-39
Ind0000000000


Prediction Score (max Score = 112)

ScoreState WinsState PercentagesCD WinsCD Percentages
86453542
piepiepiepiepie

Analysis

My Final Prediction....an Obama win....but extremely close...the election is actually a Toss-Up in my book....there are so many states that can go either way.

Popular Vote:

Obama 49.5
McCain 49.0
All Others 1.5

To watch:

1. Hispanic vote will be much closer than assumed (so overwhelmingly Obama but more akin to 60-40 to 55-45...not 75-25)

2. Youth turnout will once again be low.

3. Minnesota will surprise everyone with a McCain win late in the night.

4. PA, NM, CO, OH, NH, FL, NV will be down to the wire and really, truly can go either way...Obama could easily take all of these as could McCain.

5. OR & WA are closer than people believe as are IA and WI.

6. VA votes McCain 53 to 47.

7. If Obama wins in FL it will be due not to an overwhelming victory in South Florida but due to low turnout in the Panhandle.

8. If Indiana is called for McCain right away, sit back and wait for a McCain Presidency. If it's stated too close to call right away, it will be a long night. If it's called for Obama, the election is over.

9. KY, TN, AR, WV, LA all may top 60% McCain.

10. The white vote goes McCain: 58 to 42.


Prediction History
Prediction Graph


Comments History - show

Version History


Member Comments
 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-11-03 @ 11:16:39
To the fellow bloggers pulling for a defeat of the black nationalist, Socialist Messiah....let's hope I'm wrong and good luck in the new Obama World Order if I'm right.

To the moderate Obama supporters like dnul, good luck and if your guy wins I hope you enjoy the night.

To the cultists, please do not suffocate on the consumption of too much Kool-Aide.

To Five Senses, here's a another yo-yo. Go play in the sandbox while the adults discuss the Election Results.

Last Edit: 2008-11-03 @ 13:00:23
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-03 @ 11:55:43
Gceres says: "let's hope I'm long and good luck in the new Obama World Order if I'm right."

Wow! I hope youre long too! and if your ever single and in Ohio, I'm in the phone book; Bold print! ;)

prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-11-03 @ 12:01:49
^ Hahahaha prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-11-03 @ 12:02:28
But seriously, Gceres, I'm starting to think Minnesota is close too for some reason. Not giving it to McCain though.prediction Map

 By: satyrday (I-MI) 2008-11-03 @ 12:58:41
This is still almost as silly as Chica.prediction Map

 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-11-03 @ 12:59:29
LMAO....wow...Freudian slip I guess LOLprediction Map

 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-11-03 @ 13:06:20
You have MT and ND going Obama saturday and then call MY map silly LMAOprediction Map

 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-11-03 @ 13:09:51
WOW!!!:

COLUMBUS, Ohio, Nov. 3 /PRNewswire--USNewswire/ -- Mike Carey, president of the Ohio Coal Association (OCA), today issued the following statement in response to just-released remarks from Senator Barack Obama about the nation's coal industry.

"Regardless of the timing or method of the release of these remarks, the message from the Democratic candidate for President could not be clearer: the Obama-Biden ticket spells disaster for America's coal industry and the tens of thousands of Americans who work in it.

"These undisputed, audio-taped remarks, which include comments from Senator Obama like 'I haven't been some coal booster' and 'if they want to build [coal plants], they can, but it will bankrupt them' are extraordinarily misguided.

"It's evident that this campaign has been pandering in states like Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, Indiana and Pennsylvania to attempt to generate votes from coal supporters, while keeping his true agenda hidden from the state's voters.

"Senator Obama has revealed himself to be nothing more than a short- sighted, inexperienced politician willing to say anything to get a vote. But today, the nation's coal industry and those who support it have a better understanding of his true mission, to 'bankrupt' our industry, put tens of thousands out of work and cause unprecedented increases in electricity prices.

"In addition to providing an affordable, reliable source of low-cost electricity, domestic coal holds the key to our nation's long-term energy security - a goal that cannot be overlooked during this time of international instability and economic uncertainty.

"Few policy areas are more important to our economic future than energy issues. As voters head to the polls tomorrow, it is essential they remember that access to reliable, affordable, domestic energy supplies is essential to economic growth and stability."

The Ohio Coal Association (OCA) is a non-profit trade association representing the interests of Ohio's underground and surface coal mining producers. The OCA represents nearly 40 coal producing companies and more than 50 Associate Members, which include suppliers and consultants to the mining industry, coal sales agents and brokers and allied industries. The Ohio Coal Association is committed to advancing the development and utilization of Ohio coal as an abundant, economic and environmentally sound energy source.

SOURCE Ohio Coal Association
prediction Map

 By: pace (D-IL) 2008-11-03 @ 16:01:52
A bunch of mining executives pulling against the Democratic candidate for president?!?!?!?

Stop all the presses!

Before you know it the US Chamber of Commerce will endorse McCain!

(chuckle) I could not believe my eyes - an Obama win map! Good luck to you all the same.
prediction Map

 By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-11-03 @ 16:17:09
Apart from MN and NH, this is your most plausible map ever. You're beginning to appreciate reality... ;-)

Don't worry, Obama won't revive Brezhnev with Kenyan voodoo spellchants. You'll live through it.
prediction Map

 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-11-03 @ 17:38:41
The country will not be the same...ever again...we will be much closer to a France than to a traditional freedom-based America.prediction Map

 By: colin (R-ON) 2008-11-03 @ 18:02:06
Gceres...I agree completely with your last statement...although I am wondering why the gut feeling on Minnesota...that one confuses me. New Hampshire is entirely possible for McCain in my opinion, in fact if my map is correct and McCain pulls out NH, there will be a 269-269 split. Wouldn't that be interesting??? All these gay guys supporting McCain...VERY interesting, although in my opinion not shocking or surprising =)prediction Map

 By: HILLBILLY (O-GBR) 2008-11-03 @ 18:03:57
You've clearly lost the plot with regards to Minnesota. Otherwise, quite plausible. prediction Map

 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-11-03 @ 18:24:15
Ask dnul...Minnesota will be close...do not underestimate the impact of the NRA effort in Northwestern Minnesota or the impact of the abortion issue outside the Minneapolis area.

It will be very close in Minnesota.
prediction Map

 By: dnul222 (D-MN) 2008-11-03 @ 19:39:57
Close but MN voters are in the mood for change...Gceres is correct and I have said MN will be single digits but I feel around 55 to Obama...

In central MN highly Catholic and anti abortion the voters are upset AND the bishops have stated that people need to be more expansive in defining pro life issues...in other words the code word is out OK to vote for abortionists so long as the rest of issues are pro life...

Does that mean he will caryy my area- by no means BUT because of the isolationist tendency of central and northern MN, the economy and this pro lif eneutrality Obama will increase his % of Catholics BUT that is somewhat countered by gun owners and hunters of which the DFL itself has a majority ALSO race is an issue. One of my workers who is black and lives here in rural MN has signs in his yard and has received nasty phone calls sometimes ranting obscenities on his kids...my only point here being that racial issues are even in liberal blue MN...

This my call is 51% Obama 46% McCain and 3% other-please note that this is still a few % points improvement over the last Presidential election...


so do not jump on Gceres as on the ground in outstate MN he is on to something....but his conclusion is still worng and I hope my pessimism is too!
prediction Map

 By: tmthforu94 (I-MO) 2008-11-03 @ 21:42:16
Wow Gceres, you have really let me down. ;)
A Fox News poll had McCain up in Florida, so that gives you an excuse for putting it in the McCain column!
I agree with Minnesota. I think this could be a really really close race.
prediction Map

 By: texaslefty (I-UT) 2008-11-03 @ 23:06:13
McCain too wants to put coal companies out of business. Just ask George Voinovich!

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/congress/?q=node/77531&id=7351631

"Despite the scientific debate, the issue of global warming and proposals to address this perceived threat have received a lot of attention lately in the Senate. On one side of this debate, there are proposals to create a mandatory domestic program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such as the amendment that will be proposed by Senator McCain, to my understanding, and I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment.

It is my understanding that the amendment, according to Charles Rivers Associates, which analyzed its provisions, would cause the loss of 24,000 to 47,000 Ohio jobs, in 2010, and energy-intensive industries to shrink by 2.3 to 5.6 percent in 2020. We are talking about manufacturing industries, energy-intensive manufacturing and chemical and many others."
prediction Map

 By: Tokar (D-VA) 2008-11-06 @ 16:09:55
So...where is your post-election analysis Gceres?

#1 - It was not really close to 60-40. It was 67-33.

#2 - wrong. Youth turnout was high.

#3 - wrong. Minnesota handily went Obama.

#4 - wrong, big time.
PA - went instantly to Obama
NM - went instantly to Obama
CO - went pretty early to Obama
OH - went pretty early to Obama
NH - went instantly to Obama
FL - went to Obama before the night was over
NV - went pretty soon after closing to Obama

#5 - wrong, bit time.
OR - 57-41 Obama, a +16 spread.
WA - 58-41 Obama, a +17 spread.
IA - 54-45 Obama, a +9 spread.
WI - 56-42 Obama, a +14 spread.

#6 - wrong, big time.
VA - 52-47 Obama, a +5 spread.

#7 - wrong.
Turnout was actually UP in the panhandle over 2004. According to this site, currently 681,308 votes out of the 16 counties which constitute the panhandle. This is up 7.02%, or 44,698 votes, from 2004 which saw 636,610 votes from these same 16 counties.
These 16 counties in 2004 went 62-38 for Bush, for a total of 394,000+ votes.
In 2008 they went 60/40 for McCain, for a total of 405,000 votes. Only a 11,000 vote drop.

In south florida, turnout was UP 3.2%, but these areas went 62-38 for Obama, up from 59-41.

#8 - correct.

#9 - wrong.
KY - 57-41
TN - 57-42
AR - 59-39
WV - 56-43
LA - 59-40

#10 - close, but no cigar. White vote went 55-43.



Oh, and NH was called instantly for Obama, as was PA. Neither was CLOSE for McCain, as you have been predicting this whole election season.
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-06 @ 18:01:48
By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-06 @ 17:58:17
By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-10-22 @ 17:34:58
Predictions for surprises for Election Night as of today (I reserve the right to revise and extend these predictions LOL):

1. Virginia is 53 to 47 and not close.

2. New Mexico is super tight and goes McCain.

3. Colorado, 52 to 48 McCain.

4. Pennsylvania...no landslide here...really close...edge Obama...not called until late.

5. Indiana & Kentucky...first two states...both called immediately.

6. Florida...not decided on Election Night.

7. North Carolina...closer than Virginia.

8. Sleeper race...Washington State is closer than expected and not immediately called...Obama wins by a couple of points.



As we can see, Gceres is a loser, and was wrong on every single prediction.

The biggest losers on this website?

Chica of Light, Gceres and Conservative Republican. All of whom let their bitterness and distortion cloud their judgment.

Chica was so bitter Hillary lost, she convinced herself Obama was going to be blown out of the water with a "Bradley Effect" which did not exist.

Gceres and Conservative Republican ignored any bit of information they didn't want to hear, and convinced themselves that they were the real Americans, and that there was a conspiracy by the pollsters and the media to paint the world more liberal than it actually is. Their attitude and philosophy, and their refusal to adapt and reason is the reason why the Republicans lost, and they will continue to lose until they wise up.
prediction Map

 By: brye44 (I-WA) 2008-11-06 @ 18:37:36
You were pretty much lost from beginning to end. Next time information and a map may help.prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-06 @ 18:39:31
By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-06 @ 18:23:15
Biggest losers of 08

#8 Joe Lieberman - Mr. Lieberman let his hatred of muslims and his religious partisan ship destroy his dignity and cost him memebership in the democratic party.

#7 Elizabeth Dole - Her holier than thou art attitude cost her the election

#6 John McCain - Sold his soul and ran a negative campaign full of lies. His choice to run to the right in the worst year to do so might have cost him the election.

#5 PUMA and the bitter Hillary vote - So bitter that they lost the primary, they sold their souls to get revenge and it got them nowhere. These people showed their true colors and put their bitterness above their values.

#4 Sarah Palin - The worst possible pick for VP. She made such a fool of herself with her ignorance and extremism she will forever be seen as a laughing stock.

#3 The Bradley Effect - Absolutely no evidence of it existing

#2 Out of Touch Republicans - Their refusal to listen to anything that contradicts their world view, they convinced themselves they would win the election and that they were the "real americans". They try to mask their extremism as "mainstream values" and it once again cost them the election. They will continue this trend for quite some time until the party changes idenity.

#1 Baseless, fear based character attacks against liberals - These attacks finally lost out for the American public finally voted on the issues. Fool us once, shame on you, fool us twice shame on us and to sort of quote G W. Bush, Fool us the second time, we can't get fooled again.
prediction Map

 By: satyrday (I-MI) 2008-11-06 @ 21:27:46
Gceres was completely wrong about everything. In other words, a republican. Have a glass of Kool-Aid on me.

Last Edit: 2008-11-06 @ 21:29:15
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-07 @ 00:00:23
hahahahahahaprediction Map

 By: Tokar (D-VA) 2008-11-07 @ 02:05:20
Haha, nice one satyrday.prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-07 @ 17:23:10
One wonder if Gceres will ever have the balls to show his kool-aide drinking face in here again?prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-11-07 @ 18:53:19
Five's #s 1 & 2 - foremost in these catagories is Karl Rove, espousing the hateful and divisive politics the underlie everything the Bush administration did (and much of what the McCain campaign did, once it became desperate). Good riddence.

Geceres #8: "If Indiana is called for McCain right away, sit back and wait for a McCain Presidency. If it's stated too close to call right away, it will be a long night. If it's called for Obama, the election is over."

Not correct. While perhaps a "long night" in the sense of agony for McCain, not a long night in calling of the election. Once Ohio was called at, what, 8:30?? the writing was on the wall. While the networks held out until the West coast polls closed, anyone who knew about the electoral map knew the ballgame was over then. It was if the Cubs hit 8 grand slams in the fourth inning and the Diamondbacks had to slough through the rest of the game, knowing they were going to loose.

As for the rest of Tokar's analysis, I concur.

Poor Geceres. I suspect he'll be back in 2010, predicting that the GOP retakes both houses of Congress.
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-11-07 @ 22:06:11
I miss Gceres!prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-07 @ 22:24:06
I do too. But alas, he is too ashamed to show up, and I don't blame him.prediction Map

 By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2008-11-08 @ 10:24:48
Gceres: you can start sending those books now :) :)prediction Map

 By: jlorenzen (D-OH) 2008-11-08 @ 12:40:25
C'mon Gceres, time to man up and discuss your thoughts on the election. We've all enjoyed the give and take of our discussions. You did a good job of giving. Time to take a little bit as well.

Were your predictions based on blind optimism? Or a disbelief that there were so many Americans that could think differently than you?

Most of us would love to continue the respectfull discussions we had prior to election day.
prediction Map

 By: Tokar (D-VA) 2008-11-08 @ 14:54:48
We have terms for people who make predictions and dont have the balls to back them up after they are right OR wrong: Stooge and Fraudprediction Map

 By: dnul222 (D-MN) 2008-11-08 @ 15:53:09
COme on guys and ladies, gceres had an opinion which turned out wrong-so what! I too predicted wrongly in several areas. I was correct in central MN which went for McCain but his Catholic vote increased across our state and he handily carried gun loving North shore people....even AL Franken carried them.

On another note-Obama carries Oh=maha congressional fistrict for another electoral vote...375-163

Franken race down to 211 for Coleman...will this hold up????
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-08 @ 15:57:45
Gceres is too busy drinking "kool-aide" out of his "sippy cup" in his "sandbox" to show up and comment on this election. prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-08 @ 16:58:26
Gceres has been very friendly during the entire debate and has never name called or been openly hostile towards anyone. I didn't agree with his outcome, but that's his opinion, and I'd hope he would come back to follow up the after election debate.

@dnul- Hi dnul! First, I was just DEVASTATED about Bachmann. OMG, how incredibly sad she held on. Though i would say congrats to you all in MN -you are getting Coleman one vote at a time. I have a friend who works for our marketing group at work up in St. Louis Park and she worked for the "C-man." She is not happy with whats happening. He's in a dangerous situation because those late absentee ballots and provisionals usual favor the Dems and slowly as the ballots trickle in the lead for Coleman has narrowed from about 750 to just over 200 according to your SOS. From what I've read there could be another 6000 ballots left out there that have yet to be counted before the state of Minnesota starts a recount. I say its 50/50 who takes that MN senate race.

We have a very similar situation in Ohio. OH-15 has yet to be decided. The Dem, Mary Jo Kilroy is behind the Rep by about 130 votes. There appears to be about 10,000 ballots that have yet to be counted and about 7,000 look like the are coming from her home turf in Franklin County. According to the Columbus Dispatch, they could be students at Ohio State! If that is the case, she will win. Regardless she will have to face a recount. In 2006 Kilroy ran against Deborah Pryce. Original 2006 results had her behind Pryce by 3000 votes. After the recount she lost by just under 1000, so things look promising in OH-15, but its still a tough call.

I had thought Obama's coattails would be a bit stronger, but it appears many young voters and African Americans simply voted for Obama and left the downticket races blank. I had hoped the Dems would net around 30 in the House and 8 in the Senate but that's highly unlikely.
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-11-08 @ 17:12:56
Same thing happened with Prop 8. African Americans and Latinos here in California voted for Obama and for Prop 8.

So much for coattails. I had "hoped" that at least I would be able to give Obama credit for bringing us more democrats and turnout which would have thus lead to us defeating that measure. He is not even good for that apparently.

What an election.

Last Edit: 2008-11-08 @ 17:19:17
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-08 @ 17:13:16
Um, excuse me, Gceres constantly called people names, and was openly hostile towards Obama and his supporters. He is the same old republican thug as we are used to, and I am glad he is running away with his tail between his legs.prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-11-08 @ 17:18:22
Oh lets not start with name calling accusations Five

I mean c'mon really.

This whole forum has condemned much of your past statements.

I would not accuse Gceres solely of being inappropriate.
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-08 @ 17:23:23
You can't blame Obama for a bunch of homophobic voters. Obama himself was the first candidate ever in history to mention gay rights at the convention speech and in his victory speech. Many many many black people are hypocrits, (just as many gay people I know who hate black people are also hypocrites) But that has nothing to do with Obama.

Lets get back to what we are supposed to do as intelligent, informed individuals who judge people not on the color of their skin, or what group they belong to, but as individuals and stop the finger pointing. If you have a problem with Prop 8 passing, which any humane human being should, then blame it on homophobia in the black community as a whole, not on Barack Obama.

As far as gay rights goes, and all liberal and progressive issues of the sort, they will eventually be heard, it just takes time. When it comes to Liberalism of the social kind, Liberalism of the new and of the future, they are always bound to succeed, because Conservatism, in this form of the word and meaning, is always bound to fail because it is the old, the outdated, and the refusal to accept change. The refusal to accept new information which contradicts ones world view. It isn't just that conservatives and minority communities don't like gay people, they refuse to accept the evidence of it. They refuse to listen to scientists when they say being gay is not a choice, and they refuse to listen to gay people when they say as much as well (and if anyone should know, its gay people themselves) Instead they CLING TO THEIR RELIGION out of FEAR which tells them that being gay is a sin. That they don't question. That is the real enemy hear. That factor which shuts off thinking even in the face of discrimination and hatred.

Gay people will never give up because we are born the way we are. Wether as some gay people say "gay by god" or as others know, its just a product of nature, we will always be here and we will never go away and we will demand equal property rights as every other couple in this country.


prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-11-08 @ 17:25:53
Amen!prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-08 @ 17:32:33
My past statements? Such as? Such as what? Calling Gceres a racist. I stand fully behind that statement. Any intelligent person can read between his words and see his true motive.

I never called you a racist, liberal, because as far as I know, you aren't.

Racists exist, get over it. You poke him a little, such as I did with the Bill OReilly comment, and you get the truth out of him. He went into insane rant mode and defended OReilly's racist remarks with bittnerness and passion. He stated "Any white person would have said the same thing as O'Reilly said!" And I replied, no, any RACIST white person would have said the same thing as O Reilly said.

Again, I stand behind my remarks that Gceres is a racist, and I am glad I said it.
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-11-08 @ 17:42:11
The only problem I have with some of Obama's supporters is the assumption that anyone who voted against him and is white must be a racist. We are already hearing that now from the campaign as to why they narrowly lost Missouri due to rural racism. Democrats always lose rural Missouri its just how badly which determines if they can run up totals in Kansas City and St Louis to compensate for the margins.

We are also hearing the racism charge as to why they didnt pull off Georgia and that much of the deep south was almost 60%/40% Mc Cain.

We would have heard that as the excuse if somehow Mc Cain would have won. Not that Obama is not qualified and has no accomplishments and that people vote their ideology thats why he didnt win these states.
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-08 @ 17:52:44
Hey Liberal- It was the same thing from the primary. Yes racism exists and if you look at a map of the trends from the 2004 election to 2008 you will see that the ONLY place the trend was towards the GOP (aside from Arizona and Mass.) was in a swath of the country from Eastern OH/Western PA (Appalachia) down to the Florida Panhandle and West through southern MO out to OK and TX (White South).

That said, racism works both ways and as you said the exit polls showed in CA that blacks overwhelmingly voted Yes on 8, much more so than Republicans. Blacks are NOT socially liberal. They only vote Democratic due to economic issues. I would venture to say that White Republicans in CA would be more "gay-friendly" (They elect Drier over and over.) In many ways the Dem party is becoming so "tolerant" that its actually becoming intolerant.
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-11-08 @ 17:59:10
Agreed.prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-08 @ 18:20:58
Well, I hate to say it, but i agree with you on the whole about the issues with blacks and how they treat gay people. But having said that, its all the more reason why such a progressive liberal such as Obama, who supports gay people, will be a good influence on them ;)
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-08 @ 18:24:11
But, as Bill Maher so intelligently brought, the elephant in the room with gay hatred is religion, and there is no group that likes to drink the jesus kool-aide more than the black community. prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-11-08 @ 18:25:43
Well I have my doubts that Obama will truly use his pulpit to influence opinion in that arena as its a political risk. I hope Im wrong and your right for the sake of the community and our struggle. He has in the past surrounded himself with players that have been anti-gay or made homophobic remarks.

Lets see Obama speak out....He is now going to be president. Thats part of delivering upon promises.

Last Edit: 2008-11-08 @ 18:27:54
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-08 @ 18:43:14
Um... He has spoken out when he was *running* for president, when it was *more* risky, why wouldn't he do it once he is already elected, and it is less risky?

And none of us want him to make the mistake Clinton made, and put gay rights first, so that he ruins everything else and ends up making some compromise that is almost as bad as what we had in the first place.

I hate to say it, but gay rights isn't top on the list for any liberal, and it shouldn't be. It shouldn't be because in order for it work out in the long run, we have to wait until we get a little more people on board. And with as fast as it has been going, we shouldn't have to wait too much longer. Look at where we were just 4 years ago, and 10 years ago and 20 years ago.

The more your average Joe gets to know a gay person, the more gay people come out and let themselves be known, the more accepting we will be to people. It just takes time.
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-11-08 @ 22:44:32
I don't see why so many people care about sexual affairs so much, let alone what people do in their private lives. America seems a bit juvenile compared to the rest of the world when it comes to the politics of sex.prediction Map

 By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2008-11-09 @ 08:17:35
Indeed.prediction Map

 By: colin (R-ON) 2008-11-09 @ 09:52:20
WOW...this entire page makes me so sad. Immediately people resort to name calling and baiting. This is exactly what is wrong with the world today...prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-10 @ 23:54:48
Its been a week since Gceres has had the courage to show his kool-aide drinking face in here.

Will he ever be "man" enough to come back?
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-13 @ 16:53:35
I heard a news story that a man in Cali over dosed on kool-aide, I wonder if it was Gceres? That explains why he is a no show here.

Last Edit: 2008-11-13 @ 20:46:31
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-11-14 @ 00:32:34
Maybe it was a man trying to qualify to serve in the messiah's administration. The requirements are so tough !prediction Map

 By: pace (D-IL) 2008-11-14 @ 10:58:22
Har Har. You gotta admit though... rather poor form never showing your face again after election day when things don't go your way. prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-11-15 @ 00:17:00
No I dont gotta admit anything at the moment. Gceres has everyright to not re-appear. He made a prediction and he was wrong, so what! Almost of of our predictions were wrong to some smaller extent. Its not grounds to demonize him. I dislike Obama very much almost as much as Gceres! However, it was quite apparent to me anyway closer to election day, with the economy being what it is Mc Cain was not going to pull it off. It had always been an uphill fight for him unfortuanately. Mc Cain took a lot of blame for wearing the republican brand that I dont think was fair but hey politics is not fair nor is life so to hell with it.

I will say if Obama does in fact appoint Hillary as Secretary of State that would demostrate to me that he can actually deliver a good game not just talk one. That unity did actually mean something to him. I am trying hard to give him the benefit of the doubt and its hard because I do dislike him. That appointment would go a long way to uniting clinton people. As well as anyone who really wanted our relations around the world repaired.

Last Edit: 2008-11-15 @ 00:26:35
prediction Map

 By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-11-15 @ 06:51:26
Well actually I think the hype around Clinton makes it hard for Obama not to take her without sending a bad signal to part of the Democratic base. Those I pictured John Kerry in the job with enthusiasm I must say Clinton is perfectly fine as well. She's a household name around the world and in most governments and administrations. She's without doubt competent for the job and she would probably be terrific at it.

And I'll agree with Liberalrocks on that one, I quite liked Gceres even though we didn't agree on anything, much. Yes he was wrong but there is no need for this fingerpointing. You guys are like kids in a kindergarten and frankly it hurts me to say this because it's probably been a long time since you've left it -a longer time than me, at any rate.
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-15 @ 08:21:51
@Frenched- I think much of this talk about SOS is media driven sensationalism. It prolongs the Clinton-Obama saga. Clinton is not the only one being considered for the job. Obama has also been talking to Bill Richardson and John Kerry about SOS. I do NOT believe that Clinton will be the choice, but considering that the Obama administration is already full of "Clintonites" I wouldn't place any bets. I just don't see the liberal base of Obama supporters accepting his former rival. Hillary Clinton as SOS would spark certain outrage amongst liberals, who have been villifying her for 2 years. If he didn't want her as vice president why would he include her in the administration? The possiblity for the Clintons to outshine Obama (deliberately or not) is too great.

On the other hand it does help to keep your enemies close! The Senate might be too far away to keep Hillary in that it might give her a podium of her own that could spark a home for any "anti-Obama" faction in the Dem party, if his administration is not as successful as planned. By making her SOS, he could keep a better eye on her and then eliminate her, thus eliminating any competition in the Dem party.

Last Edit: 2008-11-15 @ 08:23:29
prediction Map

 By: Indi-rocks (R-CA) 2008-11-15 @ 13:23:39
Agreed! 

 By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-11-15 @ 13:55:49
I don't think Hillary Clinton would be an opposition force in the Senate. She and Obama agree on too many issues for that, and I think her Obama being naive talk was mainly primary talk to emphasize her own experience. She would still be an ally in the Senate and would look like a sour loser if she did it, which she has already shown she wasn't during the GE campaign.

I think the hype is overblown but also serious. Why would there have been multiple leaks from the Obama team (when there were almost none during the campaign) if they are not serious about it. True Kerry and Richardson are also viable candidates but I think right now Clinton will probably be Sec of State.
As for why SOS if not VP, I think it has everything to do with Bill Clinton. Having Bill as the Second Gentleman would have been a much greater weight on Obama than just having him as husband of the SOS in which case he can just be the special envoy he would have been anyway. And I think Obama also wanted someone between him and the Clintons and he has that person in Biden.
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-15 @ 15:22:35
@Frenched- I don't think she would be an oppostion force in the sense that Mitch McConnell will obviously be the main guy for the GOP opposition. There is obviously not a lot of policy difference between Clinton and Obama. I do think that by leaving her in the Senate she could become a power house, like Kennedy, and should an Obama administration not be as successful as intended, the Dems could once again have to "turn to the Clintons" for the main leadership role they have served since the 1990's. Certainly the liberal wing, who supported Obama, wants the Dems to gravitate towards Obama, not revert back to the more moderate Clintons. If he leaves her in the Senate he doesn't have to drag her to work every day with him but if he takes her on as SOS and he doesn't like what he sees, he can be rid of her knowing she has no podium for power as she would in the Senate and he can remain the sole power house in the Dem party, regardless of what happens in his administration.

I'm not sure that the liberals in the Dem party will be thrilled with Clinton as SOS. I'm sure the liberals are frothing at the mouth with the prospect of a Clinton SOS, as we speak! lol... She is considered more of a "hawkish" Dem, which is why many liberals did not support her. "Change we can Believe In" does not equate to putting someone in your administration, who is unapologetic about her war vote and It was HER WAR VOTE that became an enormous issues with liberals. I think Obama would best serve his base and therefore his integrity with the appointment of Richardson or Kerry. It is also worth nothing that according to the NY Times, NO official job offer was made to Clinton. She is simply one of a few who are being considered, but the media loves the Obama/Clinton story. The Times also reported that due to Bill Clinton's foreign business dealings, it may totally rule out Hillary as SOS. It is 100% speculation at this time, but I would have to lean towards Richardson as SOS.
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-11-15 @ 16:00:51
While there is some truth to Clinton as SOS being a less independent voice, she is a long wat from being any kind of powerhouse in the Senate. Kennedy has made clear he wants to shepard health care, and more senior members like Dodd wait in the wings. The idea that Clinton in more 'moderate' than Obama is also a myth - many of her positions, i.e. health care are more liberal than his, and her approach to traditional Dem. interset groups is more in line with what is genearlly thought of as liberal. While her war vote was certainly an issue in the primaries, it will be much less so if at all in a cabinet appointment, where she will clearly be part of the Obama administration which sets policy. I think she'd be great as SOS (or HHS), as would Kerry.prediction Map

 By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-11-15 @ 16:10:54
Maybe you're right. My favorite candidate is John Kerry, but I'd like Clinton as much.
Actually, I think her war vote isn't so important anymore now Obama has been elected. And I think now Obama is president he can be more open than just pandering to his own core base.
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-15 @ 16:42:40
@wingindy- I'm not trying to sound grim or morbid, but the possibility of Kennedy actually surviving one of the most dangerous forms of brain cancer is low. Lets be realistic. If he dies, God forbid, there will be a huge void in the Senate and given the "Clinton" name she could fill that void very easily. There are NO other Senators held to celebrity status like Clinton and Kennedy. She could be the next Kennedy if she stays in the Senate and she would never have to serve Obama.

Again, I disagree with you on her general philosophy. She and her husband are more moderate than Obama/Kerry/Pelosi, etc.. From trade, welfare reform, etc. Bill and Hillary are more in line with the Moderate wing. Her healthcare platform is socialist, but we are now seeing Obama move toward a more Uni-health approach that he shied from in the General election (according to the Baucus plan). The Clintons are much more "hawkish" military Dems than Kerry or Richardson. I don't buy the fact that she would be embraced all of a sudden by the liberal base. They are still holding her accountable for her war vote and her opposition to Obama in the primary. Again, please read what liberal bloggers are saying about her. She is NOT what they want in an Obama administration and Obama and Axelrod know that.

Personally, I think she would great as SOS, but I don't think the job would be hers nor do I think it wise for her to take the job in that the SOS serves at the luxury of the President and he could dismiss her anytime or she could be out of a job in 2012. If she wants to remain a political force she should remain Senator from New York and divorce herself from any intermingling with an Obama administation aside from assisting in policy making.

Last Edit: 2008-11-15 @ 16:43:33
prediction Map

 By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-11-15 @ 17:48:39
To hell with the liberal bloggers. I mean, Obama is now President and he doesn't need to please these people, he needs to get the best in his administration.
Now maybe Clinton could get a stronger voice in the Senate but I was under the impression she got herself elected in the Senate merely to run for president. If she didn't want to be tied to Obama she wouldn't have agreed to be Vice President. Not being offered while OK for VP and being offered and refusing for SOS just doesn't fit.
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-11-16 @ 01:17:51
Celebrity counts for nil in the Senate. Its all about seniority, and Clinton has very little - she'll likely be 65th in the new Senate. Many Senators with more seniority wait to fill in should Kennedy succumb, i.e. Dodd and Harkin on Health, Leahy, Boxer, & Baucus. If she stays, in ten or fifteen years she could have some serious clout, sure.

Hillary has to weigh her options carefully. There are pros and cons to her remaining in the Senate vs. an SOS post. She is certainly seriously considering SOS, as Obama is certainly seriously considering her, as neither has disclaimed interest. Contrast the chatter of her as a S.Ct. nominee some time back which she quickly smacked down. As SOS, she would be the senior administration official on foreign policy. As a senator, she will be a junior member and back bencher on significant legislation for years to come.

I agree with French re liberal bloggers. You give them more than their due. They don't even represent the organization Obama has built, which includes many independents as well as Republicans and are not, by and large, idealogues. The same campaign and its organization that rallied for an end to partisan bickering and opposed her candidacy can embrace her as a cabinet member with the same philosophy. Bill Clinton was very deft in taking credit for welfare reform, but it was a Republican initiative he put his stamp on nearly 10 years ago. That does not translate in Hillary being somehow more moderate than Obama. Likewise trade. Obama has been willing to openly challange Democratic interest group orthodoxy, from teachers' unions to the pro-choice lobby. Clinton has not.
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-17 @ 00:16:59
Obama is doing just fine by me. I am one hell of a liberal blogger and everything Obama has done in his campaign and thus far as president elect has been spot on. Its nice to see that this country is going to be run by someone intelligent again. prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-17 @ 11:51:34
Yes, I'm sure that Obama could do no wrong in your eyes, ever...

Getting back to the SOS, I think that Obama owes his base of support a liberal SOS like Kerry or Richardson and I think he will deliver upon that. I do think its becoming evident, from what we have seen in the last few days, that Obama will surround himself with those that supported him. Depending on the amount of brainwashing that has occurred amongst liberals, it is possible that Clinton could get the SOS, but not probable. I think there would be too much outrage amongst liberals if she was in the administration.

I also think a trend is emerging that the media hypes up the Clinton-Obama drama and then the Obama campaign/administration falls back on "Bill Clinton's overseas business deals" to distance itself from Hillary. Clearly the top diplomat should not have any conflicts of interest with other countries and I think Obama will use this arguement against her. There has been NO job offer, and in my opinion, this is media hype, but I could be wrong.

Its obvious that from Bill Clinton's recent "push" for her that she will grab at any power she can get and that she wants the job- as she wanted the VP. She's power hungry and the Senate is not going to satisfy her though it would probably give her a larger podium for power than SOS if Obama is a failure, thereby many Dems would look to her for leadership as they have towards Kennedy for so many years as Senator. That said, I think with Bill's recent "push" for her as SOS, along with Republicans like Rep. Blackburn, Kissinger, Sen. Kyl, and Gov. Schwarzenegger endorsing her for SOS, its going to alienate her from the liberal base and doom any remote chance she might have. I love how so many Republicans are endorsing Clinton for SOS. lol... More "Operation Chaos?"


Last Edit: 2008-11-17 @ 11:54:41
prediction Map

 By: satyrday (I-MI) 2008-11-17 @ 12:29:20
Five Senses, I agree 100%.prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-11-17 @ 13:06:22
Obama doesn't need an "argument" to use against Hillary or anyone else. He's choosing his cabinet, not a Supreme Court justice, for crissakes, and is obviously considering her seriously for SOS and perhaps other positions as well. I doubt that he will be answering any questions as to why he didn't choose any particular person for a post. Your claim that liberals are going to rise up in 'outrage' over the appointment of a liberal SOS is silly. prediction Map

 By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2008-11-17 @ 16:29:30
"To hell with the liberal bloggers. I mean, Obama is now President and he doesn't need to please these people, he needs to get the best in his administration."

Incorrect: to hell with bloggers of all stripes. Let Obama get to work making good on his word. That's the whole point of the exercise and why he was elected with an undeniable mandate.

As for Clinton: good choice, good choice. Those who know me know that I bandied this idea around as the primaries were coming to a close. I wrote then that she would be a great SOS.

Don't forget, both extremes of the spectrum tend to bellache too much: the extreme conservatives and the extreme liberals. Let 'em and at the same time, ignore them. The middle is what really counts.
prediction Map

 By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-11-17 @ 16:33:35
Doniki, I think you're still living in the postprimary trauma and still blaming it on "liberal bloggers" when it was just a tactical failure that killed Clinton. Clinton was the most Republican-hated public figure for most of the last two decades. These "endorsements" whatever they mean are just silly. There is no endorsement for US SOS. The only endorsement you get is from the President who appoints you. So it all comes down to Obama now, and regardless of Republican leaders poking their dirty nose where they shouldn't, journalists in near ecstasy over not so much, and liberal bloggers who are not as hostile about Clinton as you think since her vibrant convention speech, it will be HIS choice and if he chooses to take into account Bill's potential conflicts of interest it's a perfectly valid argument though I wouldn't care about it so much.prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-17 @ 18:08:54
@Frenched- No, there's no trauma...lol... I'm not blaming Hillary's demise on liberal bloggers. I'm simply saying that there is a great deal of resentment towards her from liberals, and it can be clearly seen, but not limited to, many liberal websites. I'm sorry, but go out and talk to Mr. Obama's most ardent supporters and they have NOTHING good to say about either Clinton. Its the same type of resentment that there is towards Lieberman. Hillary is as much to blame for her loss as are liberals, who totally dismissed anything she did for the Dem party, held her war vote against her, branded her husband a racist, and fell into the media love affair with Obama. But yes, you are 100% correct! She was the #1 GOP enemy. But please don't forget, there really was no one else in a main leadership role in the Dem party aside from Bill and Hillary Clinton, until Pelosi and Reid came along. Kennedy and his celebrity status has always been hated by the right, but he faded off when the Clintons took over. Now the GOP has Obama.

But, I'm not talking about the primary. I'm talking about SOS. I think we have two things going on here. First, You have had many prominent Republicans come out and endorse Clinton for SOS. (if you don't like that term: "endorse," than I would say "voice their support for"). I don't care what Obama does, but I think she would be a wonderful SOS. She is well respected internationally and in many cases has had a relationship with many of foreign leaders and dignitaries since her travels during the 1990's. She would be successful. Now, somehow I have a feeling that the GOP does NOT want Obama to have a successful administration. At the same time I have a feelng that Hillary still makes Obama a bit nervous because she hammered him on his lack of foreign policy experience. But by having so many conservative Republicans come out for her and not Richardson or Kerry, its going to start to alienate the liberals away from her again. Kerry and Richardson would NEVER be as effective as Clinton because they don't have the international respect she does nor the savvy she possesses. I'm sure the GOP would prefer a weaker SOS because foreign policy experience is also an issues McCain hit Obama on. Secondly, I don't think Obama knows what to do with her. It would be smart to keep on eye on her as SOS, yet would he want to have to work with her everyday? I think NOT! Those that say that Obama and the Clintons have a good relationship are politically naive. We see the media hype the drama (as was with the VP speculation- Dream Team) and then we continuously see Obama and Axelrod come out with some bogus story that Bill Clinton's "international affairs" hurt Hillary. They DO NOT want her around, yet they don't want to give her a podium of power in the Senate, like Kennedy. Contrary to what wingindy thinks, "celebrity" goes a LONG WAY in this country, and if it did not, Obama would not have gotten as far as he did because he certainly has no record or accomplishments and Sarah Palin wouldn't still be in plastered on our TV screens because she also has a shallow record and questionable intelligence!

But again, I simply don't care and am just giving my impression of the situation at hand. I have no respect for the GOP, no respect for Obama and diminishing respect for Clinton, so whatever happens does not effect my view of the situation.

Last Edit: 2008-11-17 @ 18:11:24
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-11-17 @ 23:38:25
Celebrity counts for a fair bit in public opinion. I'd note that Obama had very little name recognition or 'celebrity' prior to his win in Iowa, and even less prior to announcing his run for the presidency. Your claim, however, was that Clinton would ride her celebrity status to power in the SENATE. The Senate is governed bt seniority - there will be 64 senators ahead of her on that count. Seven Democratic Senators outrank her on the Health, Education * Labor Committee alone, notably Kennedy, Dodd, & Harkin. Kennedy has already nixed her attemp to become a subcommittee chair on universal healthcare, and Dodd has indicated his intention to lead the charge should Kennedy be unable to.

Clinton would be a wonderful choice for SOS, and would be my preference. My guess is that she is offerede the position. Kerry or Richard Holbrooke would be good choices as well. Kerry is a ranking member on the foreign relations committee, with significant involvement dating to Iran-contra, and is multi-lingual. Holbrooke has more foreign policy experience than any of them as former ambassador to Germany & the UN, and Asst. secretary of state. Richardson I'm less keen on, but he certainly has the credentials as former ambassador to the UN and diplomat to Iraq, Sudan, North Korea and Cuba.
prediction Map

 By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-11-18 @ 04:33:30
Those prominent Republicans are only significant as far as media and blogging chatter is concerned. They have no real influence on the decision and are just disrupting the transition process. So like these odious people. Schwarzenegger can go and "put some meat" in his head to replace the current vacuum.

And doniki comparing Clinton with Lieberman is nearly insulting. Clinton has always been loyal to her party, she's been great with Obama, and she DID NOT run when losing the primary. Lieberman is just a power-crazy, double-talking, vicious sub-politician. He is now virtually powerless, it makes him crazy and even Obama doesn't really care where Lieberman stands anymore. He's politically dead and decaying.

Clinton however can still be successful at something, her convention speech has redeemed her entirely for the vast majority of the base -extremists don't count, especially in Obama's moderate and presidentially open perspective.

I think Obama didn't want her as VP because Bill would have been like a second VP and SOS to boot in such circumstances. Plus he didn't want to address tensions in the Democratic party during the GE campaign: imagine the campaign ads the Republican would have had with "John McCain has a lifetime of experience and Obama has a speech." It would have hurt a lot and people would not have believed the sincerity of it as much as they believed the selfless endorsement at the convention.

Now SOS is a different thing. Depending on how Bill's conflicts of interests turn out, I think she's frontrunner for the job. Wingingy is right that other senior Senators are already wrestling for power now the Senate is largely Democratic. Remember, there are 100 Senators and only 1 SOS, and Clinton knows it.
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-18 @ 10:04:01
Oh Come on guys! Celebrity permeates so many aspects of American culture. When Ted Kennedy entered the Senate in the 60's was he anything aside from the brother of a popular president? lol... When Hillary entered the Senate in 2000, was she anything but the spouse of a popular president? I fully understand that she has little seniority and is simply 1 of 100, but her name pulls weight in the Senate even now, as did the Kennedy name, way before Ted Kennedy was ever the #2 man in the Senate!

I honestly DO NOT CARE what she does or who Obama picks for SOS. I'm simply stating my opinions. But I think that some people are fooling themeselves if they think there isn't going to be a backlash against Obama by his liberal base if Clinton is the choice. The liberals have spent 2 years villifying this woman and you expect them to except her just because Obama does? lol... Granted Obama has created his own little cultlike innercircle that will say, do, and go along with anything he does- much like the evangelicals with Bush, but you also have some hard core liberals that do have a mind of their own and are not going to be happy or swayed towards Clinton, especially since the Obama administration appears to be packed full of Clintonites already! Don't forget, these are the same liberals- wealthy, young and white- that poured millions of dollars into the Obama campaign to defeat Clinton and McCain.
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-11-18 @ 11:22:12
The Guardian reports that Clinton intends to accept Obama's offer to be SOS. We'll see about 'backlash'. As with any strong personality, there are those that will never be pleased with Clinton, at both ends of the spectrum.

Shall we move on? Napolatino or Holder for Attorney General? Jones, Gates, or Hagel for Defense? Jones or Hagel to head National Security Council? What about Treasury?
prediction Map

 By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2008-11-18 @ 11:51:40
NO backlash. The majority of DEMS are more centrist as Indy and I are. And as I wrote, the extreme left and the extreme right will bellyache anyway.

And statistically, it is not the extreme left that got Obama elected. His coalition was broad and based mostly of the middle, as exit polls from ALL outlets are clearly showing. So, he owes the extreme left no more of an explanation for anything he does than he would give to the general public at large, anyway.

And with change.org, I have never seen a more transparent transition than this one. Everyone gets to look in and see what is happening.
prediction Map

 By: dnul222 (D-MN) 2008-11-18 @ 14:51:42
I agree with Bonncaruso as one of the centrist Dems who supported Obama early after his win in MN on 2/6. I thought he had the best chance to win and he won convincingly. The Washington Post cartoon is funny today....I will miss only the cartoon characterizations of Bush.prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-18 @ 16:55:26
Moving on.. okay... lol...

Looks like it will be Holder for AG! Strategic don't you think? I don't know any other Dem that could beat McCain in Arizona in 2010 besides Napolitano. She is a very well respected general consenus Governor, a very moderate Dem, and advocate for womens health/rights. I like McCain, and it will sad to see another moderate getting purged from the GOP, but the Dems are all about strategy- wow they got into shape fast! lol... Seriously, I think Napolitano will be the junior Senator from AZ in 2010 and do an excellent Job.

I'm torn on Defense- Hagel or Gates? anyone have any opinions?
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-18 @ 17:12:11
Doniki, as usual, isn't making much sense. If anything Obama is picking the USUAL CLINTON people for his cabinet, not the people who sucked up to him all along. We will see what happens with the rest of Obama's picks, but I will have one criticism of Obama if he doesn't start varying up his cabinet picks.

Hillary for Sec of State I think its great, a couple of old Clinton people is great and smart, and a moderate Republican or two is smart, but he needs some new fresh faces too.



Last Edit: 2008-11-18 @ 18:44:05
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-18 @ 18:02:59
Thanks Five, being that youre the lucid one of the bunch! lol...

Politico is saying Clinton is undecided and the job has not been offered to her. Seems to follow the theme from yesterday where Obama staffers were "exhasperated" by the Clinton camp. This entire SOS fiasco has got to be media hype for a continuation of the Clinton/Obama saga. I'm betting on Richardson as SOS. Too many "clintonites" already, why add the real thing? No Drama Obama, right? lol...

I think were going to go back to the excuse "Bill's international business dealings are a conflict of interest." Lets be honest- The idea of Clinton as SOS was floated. It did not catch with the liberals who are throwing a fit about so many Clinton people in the "Change we Can Believe in" administration and now Obamas has to find someone else. The stories of HRC "not sure about accepting" are a way for her to bow out gracefully without embarassing either her or No Drama Obama. Does Richardson count as a "Clintonista" to a liberal?

Last Edit: 2008-11-18 @ 18:28:15
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-18 @ 18:42:16
Look at doniki the little conspiracy theorist. He hasn't learned his lessons from the past I see and continues to underestimate Obama. prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-18 @ 19:32:50
Yes I'm a non-believer in "The One." :)

But, come on this is hype. The "meeting" in Chicago. (McCain met with Obama in Chicago too) The "vetting" process. (Holder hasn't even been vetted according to CNN and he's AG). The ringing endorsements from Republicans. (Operation chaos part 2)

These two have no intention of working together and can't stand each other. Having either Clinton anywhere near the adminstration does not equate to the mantra "Change We can Believe In." I said the same thing during the VP "vetting." Obama is NEVER going to want to be overshadowed by the Clintons and they all have such HUGE EGO's that it is probably something that isn't even in consideration and they both know it, but the media is so Obama crazed that they can't leave anything alone including the Clinton-Obama saga. Its really unfortunate because some of her supporters or "fans" are still under the impression that she is relevant. How twisted.
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-11-18 @ 23:27:44
How silly to think we could move on from this compelling topic. If it were not under consideration you would have had a denial from one or both parties within a day of the story breaking. The "not sure if accepting" could just as well be cover for a potential inability to overcome conflicts presented by Bill and his Foundation. If it doesn't happen, we'll never know for sure.

I think its going to happen. It would be a brilliant choice for the Obama administration, both for the domestic audience, and the message it sends the world - a well known woman and former rival heading the State Dept. It would be beneficial to Clinton, as well, IMHO.
prediction Map

 By: Indi-rocks (R-CA) 2008-11-19 @ 00:14:37
(Liberalrocks-now Indi-rocks)

For once I hope your right wing.

Donny Doni Donny ! Hillary is still relevant she just had her speakerphone robbed from her. I dont quite know what to make of all this Secretary of State talk. I think it would be a great opportunity for her to shine and demostrate strengths the same strength I admire so deeply in her. I think Obama would be foolish and egocentric not to offer it to her and the only excuse he could possibly come up with would be Bill. Th only reason for a no go offerwould be Obama's ego getting in the way! If Hillary isnt offered this postion he will have said f-you to some of her supporters that very luke warmly voted for him. I still proudly proclaim not to be one of them! He owes it to her for campaigning for his ass for which I might add she owed him nothing. She gave the speeches and traveled the trail and it appears it worked. I still have not seen one sign of gratitude out of him!! This would be -HIS- moment to give back to her (in as much as he has done nothing to help retire her debt)

Not that it matters, but it would help me to see him in a different non-egotistical light if he put fear pride and personality aside and did the right thing and gave the qualified candidate(which didnt happen in the primary)the job.

I still am very disappointed at how the vp process went and Obama's very nasty 3am release of the information that Hillary would not be vp and that Biden had it. That was intentional and mean spirited and down right nasty f-you. Ofcourse that was before she campaigned for him. We shall see... Im trying real hard not to be suprised one way or another Obama has not delivered for me on many occasions... We'll see.

Last Edit: 2008-11-19 @ 00:17:39
 

 By: Indi-rocks (R-CA) 2008-11-19 @ 00:28:30
I will donate to Mc Cain's re-election in 2010. Particuliarly if Napolitano is the democratic nominee she was particuliarly harsh toward Hillary in the primaries and I am a Mc Cain fan. I think it would be very bad to see another moderate republican lose and after losing in 2008 I dont want to see that for John Mc Cain! (Sad) He has a record of acheiving bipartisan solutions in the senate of which democrats have praised. Hopefully people will value a bipartisan but oppostion based voice in 2010.

Im not sure what will be happening in my homestate of California in 2010. Barbara Boxer (for which I have been an advocate) is up for re-election. Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger (for which I also have advocated) may run against her. I would truly be torn as to who to vote for. There are also reports that my other fav gal Dianne Feinstein may run for governor when Schwartzenegger's term limited, and appoint her replacement if(I should say when) elected. Dianne is the most popular politician in the state and would be a shoo in for election to the governorship despite her age of 75 currently. So 2010 could be a real shake up

Last Edit: 2008-11-19 @ 00:29:45
 

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-19 @ 11:08:09
@Liberal or Indi :)

First, I think that its possible that she will be SOS, but not probable. 1.) there is so much media hype around this story that we don't know what is real. The story changes by the day. The media loves Obama and they love any story they can get their hands on regarding the Clinton-Obama drama. 2.) these are two people that do not like each, therefore why would Obama want Clinton to represent his administration as SOS. He didn't chose her for VP. He does NOT want to drag her and Bill to work with him and possibly be outshined by them on the worlds stage 3.) Obama's ego doesn't feel that he "owes" her or her supporters anything for their support. he feels he will get it regardless- and he's right. 4.) Clinton would be tied down to the Obama administration, without a platform of her own, therefore if she holds any further political ambition she is out of luck if Obama is not a success 5.) Clinton owes Millions in debt that she would not be able to raise money for as SOS, under current law. 6.) Obama is already under pressure from the right and the left because he has basically assembeled an administration that looks like "Clinton's 3rd term." Liberals want a clear cut from the Clintons.

Honestly, I don't care if she is SOS, or not, but I think there is a lot of power playing and a lot of ego satisfying in the Clinton and Obama camps. I see both sides of the situation in both camps. In Clinton's case: Pro- Clinton as SOS definitely gives her more power than being 1 of 100 in the Senate. She is also likely to be good at her job as SOS, in that she is well respected on the worlds stage. Con- she is at the mercy of Obama, and his inner circle that has been vehemently anti everything Clinton. Obama's success/failure will trickle down to her and could effect her ambitions in the future. In Obama's case: Pro- Obama would be wise not to allow her a voice in the Senate and keep her under his watch as SOS; serving at his pleasure, therefore stopping any political ambitions she might have for 2012 or 2016. Con- Obama must drag her and Bill to work with him everyday and face the scrutiny of liberals who are not pleased at the current situation in which it appears that "the gangs all back" from the Clinton administration. It is appearing evident that Hillary was right when she said that "Change We Can Believe In" is really "Change That Can Be Xeroxed."
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-19 @ 11:24:57
Also, I like McCain too. I just don't think he will be able to retain his Senate seat against Napolitano. But, even though she endorsed Obama early on, which I didn't like, I think she has been an effective governor. Anybody that can run the state of Arizona and Campaign for John Kerry, all while being treated for breast cancer can handle the job of Senator! prediction Map

 By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2008-11-20 @ 17:56:59
Napolitano will not be a danger anymore, she is moving to homeland security.

But McCain is still in danger, in a state that is changing demographics quickly. Could still be a close race in '10.
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-22 @ 22:59:03
I heard a rumor Gceres OD'ed on kool-aide and that is why he no longer posts here.

Last Edit: 2008-11-22 @ 22:59:16
prediction Map

 By: tmthforu94 (I-MO) 2008-11-25 @ 13:04:37
McCain will easily win in 2 years. He beat Obama pretty comfortably in that state, and Obama was a high profile candidate. I can't see anyone being able to beat McCain.prediction Map

 By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2008-11-25 @ 17:48:57
He beat Obama comfortably, but -1.95% under Bush's margin and -6.04% under the 60 year average for this state (AZ). Obama, on the other hand, won his homestate of IL 61.80% to 36.89%, a +24.91% margin, compared to McCain's +8.52% in AZ. Obama won Biden's homestate with +25.00%.prediction Map

 By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2008-11-25 @ 17:49:14

52.77!!!!!!!



Currently, Obama's national average, which last week was at +6.72, has moved up to at least +6.92, a margin jump of +0.20 in 9 days. Interestingly enough, the state in the Union that comes the closest to mirroring the national average is: VA.


If Obama holds at +6.92, then the national partisan shift from 2004 to 2008 would be: +9.38


The final national polls on 11/03-11/04 had an average of +7.54, and I made the following prediction:


Obama: 52.77%

McCain:45.23%

Other: 2%


As of 11/25, 17:00 EDT, here are the numbers I have:



Candidate

Pop. Vote

%

Pop. Margin

% Margin

Total

129,147,277

100.00%

--

--

Obama (D)

68,141,444

52.77%

+8,937,640

+6.92%

McCain (R)

59,223,804

45.85%

Other:

1,789,029

1.38%


Comparison - my projection to current results:


Candidate

Current %

Bonncaruso's prediction:

Difference:

Obama (D)

52.77%

52.77%

+/- 0.00%

McCain (R)

45.85%

45.23%

+0.62

All others

1.38%

2.00%

-0.62%



Comparison to 2004:


Year

Democratic:

Republican:

All Others:

Total:

2008

68,141,444

59,223,804

1,789,029

129,147,277

2004

59,028,439

62,040,610

1,224,499

122,293,548

Difference:

+9,113,405

-2,816,806

+564,530

+6,853,729



If the tend continues, then Obama may somewhat overshoot 52.77, but for now, my prediction is EXACTLY on the money.

prediction Map


User's Predictions

Prediction Score States Percent Total Accuracy Ver #D Rank#Pred
P 2012 President 51/56 37/56 88/112 78.6% pie 3 375 534T760
P 2010 Senate 30/37 17/37 47/74 63.5% pie 1 196 280T456
P 2008 President 49/56 37/56 86/112 76.8% pie 52 1 324T1,505
P 2008 Senate 32/33 17/33 49/66 74.2% pie 2 5 144T407
P 2008 Dem Primary 29/52 11/52 40/104 38.5% pie 1 - 106T271
P 2008 Rep Primary 18/49 4/49 22/98 22.4% pie 2 - 152T235
P 2007 Governor 2/3 1/3 3/6 50.0% pie 1 40 135T167
P 2006 U.S. Senate 31/33 15/33 46/66 69.7% pie 2 26 257T465
P 2006 Governor 30/36 18/36 48/72 66.7% pie 1 76 157T312
P 2004 President 52/56 35/56 87/112 77.7% pie 6 21 474T1,994
Aggregate Predictions 324/411 192/411 516/822 62.8% pie


Back to 2008 Presidential Prediction Home - Predictions Home


Terms of Use - DCMA Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC 2019 All Rights Reserved